Population control Isn't it about time?

a population control could also be is you have to ask to bring this person into the world you cant just go popin em out maybe we 1 child familys on average instead of 3.5 kids tha hard part would be not haveing a kid what to do a fin its a person and has right but isnt smart enuf to vote yet but is death a choice



i think ATS should have polls so we can have rudamentry votes

Originally posted by obzerver
also a population control is you have to ask to bring this person into the world you cant just go popin em out maybe we 1 child familys on average instead of 3.5 kids tha hard part would be not haveing a kid what to do a fin its a person and has right but isnt smart enuf to vote yet



i think ATS should have polls so we can have rudamentry votes

nah just create jobs, like a space community would inspire, educate your people to work in them, the new tech developed would provide quality of life to places like somalia and ethiopia, etc, and jobs and a drive for education. it needs a positive direction. we've been so busy pointing at each other, we forgot to look up. we are 3 dimensional creatures (4 dimensional if you include things like the human spirit), so why are we thinking 2 dimensionally?

reply to post by Reaper2137


Here is where I would say you are naive and have incorrect facts. I might also add that this "College" of yours is teaching you propaganda so that you will be a good little slave to the corporation and neo-conservative agenda. BUT it seems that the rest of our intelligent ATS brethren have already done that. Cheers!

look we humans have forgotten the way nature works

Too many of one species = too many of predators
too many of predator = too little of one species
too many humans = nothing at first.
far too many humans = too little of everything
overpopulation = starvation.

so what happened to the predator for us humans?

Originally posted by SirMike
Always the question left unanswered is “how to we do it” … that’s usually left to the imagination of the reader.

We can reduce the Grow of Population by a working Welfare System,
Children are the Insurance for many People
that they have something to eat and a place to be in the older Age!

I saw many overcrowded Places in my Life,
the most horrible in India,
that was real bad,
but we need to ask why People need to live under such bad circumstances,
why so many Indians need to move into the big Towns like Mumbai or New Delhi.

Dharavi for example as of November 2006 there was only one toilet per 1,440 residents in Dharavi (source NYT)
but many of the People are happy to be there because they can earn Money and Money is needed!

reply to post by e11888


Well, that was my answer and I have no children currently, and I'm not planning on having more than two. I personally find Gore's(?) push for it despite the number of children he has hypocritical.

reply to post by SirMike


Now first of I personally don't care if you comply or not. If you would have read my above post you would have understood this very simple fact. I am just telling you what is a feasible option. If you don't comply that's your own choice and it is your right to make that choice. However if humanity does not reach a unified conclusion about this matter I promise you nature will and it won't be pretty.

Let's think about this,


Caucasians, or people that aren't considered poor, we're the ones consuming exponential amounts of resources, not just food, we generically have 1 child per family

Minorities, from what I can tell usually have many children per family, and consume less resources than anyone else.

I used to wonder why minorities had 324234324 children per family, then i realized later in life it's to give their bloodline a better chance of survival, as it's likely most of those children will die.

All of this could blend together if people stopped being greedy, that perhaps goes against our nature as 5 million years ago if we didn't have a base form of greed we would never try to improve anything and learn, regardless of the goal.

Originally posted by SyntaxConspiracy

Let's think about this,


Caucasians, or people that aren't considered poor, we're the ones consuming exponential amounts of resources, not just food, we generically have 1 child per family

Minorities, from what I can tell usually have many children per family, and consume less resources than anyone else.

I used to wonder why minorities had 324234324 children per family, then i realized later in life it's to give their bloodline a better chance of survival, as it's likely most of those children will die.

All of this could blend together if people stopped being greedy, that perhaps goes against our nature as 5 million years ago if we didn't have a base form of greed we would never try to improve anything and learn, regardless of the goal.

i think the problem is inherent in self respect. if you truly respect yourself, you learn to respect others as well. if you respect others, it doesn't matter what race/religion/political stance they are or have. what matters is teaching each other to respect one another. if leaders respect their citizens, they make laws that allow their people to prosper. if they don't respect one another, they make laws that allow crime/disrespect to rob their people of their prosperity. it all goes back to the leaders of the countries. if the leaders of somalia were interested in their own people and their prosperity, they wouldn't still be suffering.

Just a thought to drop into the pool....

I live in Britain and the number of natives having children is being far outstretched by the number of mothers coming in from outside the UK. To a point where the NHS is having trouble coping.

Now - I have no issue with people having babies - as long as their enviroment can handle it. But we are like rodents in some respects - we do not know when to say stop!

What I do have issue with is this idea of 'the woman's right' to have children'. I thought it was down to nature and whether she gifted you with children. Controversial thought I know.

Science is a wondrous thing but it it is a double edged sword.

Originally posted by Reaper2137


Population Control,

What would it take to bring us down to a manageable size?

Because if we don't come up with some thing soon, some one may do it for us and we might not like their plan.

We do realize it is a problem, the solution is simple. we must AGREE to have one child per pair only. Note it mustnt be forced like china does. develope a system where people wont feel alienating and feel they are helping the world survive.


The design work work like this


[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d25f53c21498.jpg[/atsimg]



Notice how the shape looks like a pyramid? Perhaps there is more knowledge in the pyramid than we thought. This way, everyone wins, no deaths needed, just simple agreement.

reply to post by Reaper2137


People have a right to mate as they wish. If they mate too much, death takes care of the excess.

Simply put, don't get involved where a thousand million rifles are hiding to greet you.

Not enough water for everyone? Build Desalinization Plants.

Not enough food? Build greenhouse skyscrapers in every community.

Running out of room for everyone? Shoot for the stars.


You have been programmed to hate your fellow man and to think of each other as viruses on the planet.

If you researched population growth you'll find that where ever women are educated, have opportunities to excel at an occupation, have all the same rights and privileges as men; then you know that these women on average have fewer than replacement level children.

How to solve the population "problem". Educate and free women. This is not a popular idea in many countries or religions, particularly in the middle east, but it is the only way. Women who are free and can truly choose their destiny and life choose to have on average 1.3 children which is below replacement level.

As long as we coddle societies that oppress women, keep women locked away, don't allow females to choose their mates, don't educate girls they will continue to be rabbits. To be a rabbit in a society like that is the only way to keep the male who holds them in a form of slavery to feed, clothe, and shelter them for the sake of his offspring.

Another way that the PTB is aggressively promoting population reduction is the advocacy of the homosexual lifestyle. Why do you think they want homosexuality taught as a role model for children? Homosexuals generally don't procreate but adopt, which reduces the surplus population. The PTB promotion of homosexuality has nothing to do with "rights" or "equality" rather with population control.

To truly control the population, educate women rather than men, don't allow males to choose their mates, only females can choose their mates and males have no say in the process. Keep men at home, cloistered, covered and dependent on women. Then you will see a huge decrease in population, as women will have total control of their reproduction and their lives. Most likely the reproduction rate would fall below 1 per couple.
Since this is not likely to happen - we must as a world insist that women be allowed to be free and choose their own destiny free from male "protection". To the women living in a world where men dominate them and treat them as vagina's and breeders, do your newborn females a favor, don't allow them to live in this type of world. Do what you have to do to keep your daughter from being born into a world where women are married off before puberty, kept cloistered and hidden from the world. Men, if you live in this type of society, if you have any compassion at all don't allow your daughters to be born into this type of world to be used and live a miserable existence. This will also reduce the population and keep your daughters from living the kind of life you are living since they will live happily with your God.

reply to post by RisenAngel77


You can motivate and encourage. You can never force it.

Unfortunately for you, most people, including myself, plan on having 2-3 kids, or more, should we make it off decently. Simply because we see this sort of thing happening, and as good parents, favor replacing your lack of reproducing with our own type of people. It's been done before, by many immigration groups, cultures, religions, etc etc. It's a sure-fire policy to reject and topple over this sort of mentality. You simply pick up where another side desires to pride itself off its own extinction.

So really, no problem by me. If one side has fewer kids, I'm encouraged to have more to replace them.

Overpopulation – is an issue but it is a regional issue not an issue worldwide.

For the “everyone on earth could have 2.5 acres to grow their own food” crowd, who will manage this program?

Who will decide what land each person gets as all land is not equal?

Who will transport the population around the globe, in an out of countries with borders, people with languages and cultures that are diametrically opposed?

Who will decide which lands that are owned justly by others will be confiscated and given to the people?

What is too much land, wealth and or too much of anything for any one person to have and again who shall decide what "enough" is?

What body will then confiscate (a good deal of force likely required) the land and resources from those with too much and what organization will transport the goods and people all over the globe to reallocate the land?

This “one world” nonsense is just that.

There is a problem with overpopulation but it is not a global one – it is a largely a local issue maybe regional at best.

The problem is when local populations outgrow the ability of their region to support the population.

These people can’t expect the other rest of the world’s people and nations to just feed and support their over proliferation indefinitely sometimes to their own detriment.

What about their own children – they are responsible and have only what they can afford and because others are irresponsible they have to give up their success?

Redistribution of the wealth from the 1st the 3rd world so we can all live in a 2nd world nation equally is not the answer and will never happen.

Sucks to live in a country where food don’t grow but as a farmer here in the US you are not getting me to work so you can eat while you give me nothing in return - sucks huh?

Humans are competitive survivors. Life is not fair; it is a competition plain and simple depending on your belief system it has been from the beginning (Cain and Able or perhaps); belief systems aside, competition has been ongoing since the first cave man killed another who hunted deer on "his" lands to modern times.

It is human nature to compete for resources - if you want to gather them for your own, family, tribe, state or nation you have to understand that others are going to have less.

People may call me harsh and heartless all they like; that does not change the fact that many people are not going to quietly sit by and watch their lifetime of hard work be redistributed to the third world so that we can live equitably.

Again I ask, who is the authority to whom people are going to submit to arbitrate the redistribution of all the land and resources?

I find it ironic and likely that most of the people who believe the "earth belongs to everyone" are usually those who have acquired little success or wealth for themselves. Likely their tunes will would change if they had something of worth or value to protect for themselves.

The charity we send to these places in need just makes the problems worse – they never will achieve that balance if we continue to sustain the numbers artificially.

reply to post by undo


Your comment about a mature populas is logical very much so.

Certain Christian groups, not as a whole (cause I do know reilgions people who love the universe) but the other day on Facebook I got a random message from some lady in utoa apperently she found on name on a evolution page and contacted me. Saying evolution is a lie, aliens are demons and I will burn in hell (or a volcano) forever because I don't believe in HER god.

I've heard the same from Jews, some extremeist Muslims (although they seem to be the most tolerant and chill of all) and not so much Hindus either, they are also tolerant and chill.

There are extremists on both sides, the ones fearing space I believe is a little more personal. A universe with no concept of up or down, can frighten some. Especially when we aren't in the center of everything, like being in the center of the ocean with nowhere to go, can be overwhelming. Especially being so incredibly tiny, can cause some emotional distress.

Reilgions experiences are submissive, there is a lobe in your right side of the brain that controls anxiety about death thus gives you a little "chemical" that causes you to see # that not real, thus giving the impassion you had a reilgious experience. Which can account for ALL religious experiences, I think I just shat on all diehard god fans.

But I hope greatly for a future in space, we have always craved for a cosmic purpose, well let's find a worthy goal, space stations, moon mining and even bases, mars colonized. The future is limited to what you think will happen, you think the end is coming well then so will everyone else, and nothing happens so they make it end ww3 nukes and stuff.

Believe in a great, wonderful and peaceful future you will have it. This is called the quantum leap , we are in our own universe, yet interconnected. So the choice is yours, even when things seem hopeless believe in something wonderful.

Population control should not be the choice of anyone but the two parents.
The state should stay out of it
The church should stay out of it
The extended family should stay out of it.
Exception - The father should not be allowed to scurry off and hide leaving the teenage/pre-teenage woman to face the consequences of motherhood alone (nor should such a person have control over her life until she is old enough to stand up for herself )

reply to post by Golf66


Well actually the idea is that the whole world could live in Texas at a density of Manhattan Island. Obviously this is unreasonable, but what it does mean is that humans are very much so able to survive on this world.

Resources, as you said, are mainly a local issue in the 3rd world. Not so much in the 1st world. However all in all, the fact is that long ago these people knew how to survive. Globalism has robbed them of that native knowledge and turned them into dysfunctional mind slaves for factories. Do you really think people would live in shanty towns if they knew how to build and survive properly?

Originally posted by Anthony1138
reply to post by undo

 

Your comment about a mature populas is logical very much so.

Certain Christian groups, not as a whole (cause I do know reilgions people who love the universe) but the other day on Facebook I got a random message from some lady in utoa apperently she found on name on a evolution page and contacted me. Saying evolution is a lie, aliens are demons and I will burn in hell (or a volcano) forever because I don't believe in HER god.

i don't believe in the current strain of evolution but i do believe that space is the next frontier and why we aren't building new communities there to expand the possible jobs, knowledge and tech capable of creating high quality of life for everyone, is a big question for me. we have the tech to do this already! what is going on?
don't worry before your life is over, you will be told you are bad for whatever reason by people of every walk of life, even people who share your same world view. it isn't a christian thing, it's a human thing.

reply to post by VforVendettea


Well ideally it would be simple. State supplies birth control, church supplies aid, family supplies house. But things aren't always so ideal.

If you ask me, things like abortion and the lot really shouldn't be allowed for anyone except whose freedom's were taken, like in rape or near death situations. There's so much birth control and knowledge available that really its your own damn fault if you get pregnant. And if the father runs away, he automatically forfeits any profit he gains to the state, to decide how his money should go. See that's where the state is needed. In responsibility enforcement. You really do have choice over your body, Your body, your choice. But that choice was made in having sex and how you did it. If you screw up, you have to take responsibility.

More or less such a situation entitles certain fears, and at the very least, promotes knowledge of how not to have a kid. For kids having kids, it seems that's just about the only way to make them learn, because they're too stupid otherwise.